Saturday, October 3, 2015

Planning Division's Fate To Be Discussed Monday

Members of the public who are monitoring the proposed outsourcing of the Planning Division should be on hand by 6:30 p.m. Monday to hear City Council discussion of the topic.

The administration proposed the outsourcing for an estimated $200,000 in savings and a more streamlined handling of development applications, although residents have disputed both reasons.

Personnel matters are usually discussed in closed session, but as permitted under the Rice notice law, affected employees have requested that the  that the portion of the governing body's executive session regarding the outsourcing be open to the public. The executive session begins at 6:30 p.m. in Municipal Court, 325 Watchung Ave.

On Sept. 8, supporters of the Planning Division came out and waited to hear the council discussion. See Plaintalker's report on the discussion of outsourcing here.

Since then, the city has published a request for proposals on outsourcing Planning and Zoning and has received bids on Oct. 1.

At Thursday's Planning Board meeting, Planning Director William Nierstedt mentioned Monday's public hearing and said bids had been received for the proposed outsourcing. In answer to Plaintalker's email Friday, Council President Bridget Rivers said people should arrive by 6:30 p.m. Monday to be on hand for the public discussion regarding the Planning Division outsourcing.

The Planning Division provides support to the Planning and Zoning Boards as well as the Historic Preservation Commission and the Shade Tree Commission. See the Planning Division's mission statement here.

Residents have expressed skepticism that an outside firm can provide the same amount of attention to land use issues that the in-house Planning Division provides, but officials say all but one other of Union County's 21 municipalities rely on outside firms for planning and zoning services.

--Bernice

7 comments:

  1. I have been a member of the Plainfield Planning Board for almost fifteen years. Board members are non-paid volunteers who give their time and expertise because they care about Plainfield and the people who live here. I am also a licensed practicing architect.

    On Monday October 5, 2015 at 6:30 pm, the City Counsel will decide whether or not to put the outsourcing of the Planning Division on its schedule. I am troubled by these efforts to outsource the Planning Division, they perform complex tasks on a daily basis, helping business and homeowners understand and navigate the necessarily complicated zoning ordinances and the application and approval processes. They also thoroughly review all alteration, addition, historic approval and development applications for compliance with the City’s Master Plan and City, State and National ordinances, and make appropriate analysis and reports to help the Planning, Zoning and Historic Review Board members understand the pertinent issues and make informed decisions.

    The Planning Division responsibilities also include performing the bulk of the work involved in the required updating of the City Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance and the yearly preparation, review and recommendation to the City Counsel of the Capital Improvement Projects – C.I.P. as well as code enforcement.

    I have heard that developers criticize the Division for not being developer friendly. I can only say that my experience is quite the opposite. In recent years the zoning ordinance and master plan have been updated to create transit oriented development areas around the downtown and Netherwood train stations with generous incentives to development and that it is working and there is a great deal of developer interest in these areas. Based upon my many years working closely with this office I can testify that they are talented, experienced, knowledgeable professionals who have in mind the best interest of all the people of Plainfield.

    My biggest concern about the elimination of the Planning Division is that property owners and developers will not have access to the efficient, knowledgeable and immediate service that exists today. My experience as an architect working in towns with outsourced planning and zoning consultants is that the consultants are very difficult to contact, and to get a returned phone call. Another concern is that depending on consultants may leave many of the Division’s current responsibilities neglected or not done, particularly code enforcement, the C.I.P. preparation and master plan and zoning ordinance review and updating.

    Based on my experience I believe that the development and variance projects will take far longer to process and that the quality of the review could be substandard, inadequate or incomplete and misleading and that the cost to taxpayers will be greatly increased. This will be a burden to Plainfield property owners who want to maintain and improve their property and a major obstacle to future development in the City of Plainfield. The lack of competent in-house organization and analysis of variance and development applications and board meeting preparation, will make the tasks of the Planning, Zoning and Historic Review board members much harder and may result in talented, experienced and dedicated members resigning. Finding competent replacements may be difficult.

    I hope that the city council agrees that this objective is counterproductive and would result in poorer service at a much greater cost to taxpayers and that they choose to not put the outsourcing of our well functioning planning and zoning services on the agenda or pursue the issue any farther.


    William Toth
    Vice Chairman
    Planning Board
    City of Plainfield

    ReplyDelete
  2. I understand that the low bid was for $109,000. The question is whether there were any qualifications accompanying the bid? That is, conditions which open the door to additional billing. It seems improbable in the extreme that the laundry list of responsibilities contained in the bid proposal could be performed for $109,000. If the bid is qualified, which I suspect, there is absolutely no way in which anyone can determine what the final annual cost to the City will be.. I am advised that the high bid was in the order of $250,000 which is more realistic. However, the same question applies. Was that bid unqualified, or did it contain, " by the ways"' which leave you in no man's land? Given the enormous disparity in the bid prices one must ask were these "professionals" looking at the same job? The fundamental question remains as to whether it is prudent to dissolve what appears to be a well performing arm of government. Perhaps their liability is that they are unbiased in their performance.
    Bill Kruse

    ReplyDelete
  3. If the Planning Dept was all Afro American or Democrat would we be see this subject on the Council adjenda? I am so sorry that I pushed the wrong button this last Election. I though the Mapp administration was going to honest and upstanding . Now all he cares about is supporting John Stewart and Cretilla in their Real Estate deals. Plainfield is a historic family community,and should remain as such. Mapp wants to turn it into the promise of luxury apartments ( just look at the last so called luxury apts ) with no parking. The apartments that are going up now are low quality,buy a friend of Mapps who has not kept up with his tax payments. If he can not keep up with paying his taxes on time,how does he have the money to build high quality apartments? I do not want to see beautiful historic Plainfield turned into overcrowded,dirty,not enough parking space City like Elizabeth.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mayor Mapp wants to save the taxpayers money why doesn't he eliminate his side kick John Stewart? If Mapp did not want to do the work as a Mayor the he should not have run. Why be a Mayor if you want some one else do your job at a high cost to the tax payers! If the Mayor wants to save money then get rind of John Stewart! That would save the TAX PAYERS over $150,000 per year or more. ( remember employees are salary plus benefits ).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Here we go again. There is total confusion about what will happen tomorrow night, and whether the public will get to address it. The City will be on the wrong end of a lawsuit if it fires the planners even partly for the reasons I believe started this process.

    ReplyDelete
  6. How will the outsourced firm adhere to Title 47 Public Records Retention Law? Now all the records are available in the planning department for review by the public for any application. This allows for transparency, but if outsourced the people will not have available access. There goes democracy. Sad day for Plainfield.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sounds like a good plan. But I would start with getting rid of Bill Neirstedt first. That would be a great improvement.

    ReplyDelete